I resent that. Why, I… Ooh, look, shiny!
Now, where was I?
People continue to consume tobacco.
[QUOTE=humanafterall]
Inversely, what’s the best-case scenario?
[/QUOTE]
People continue to consume tobacco.
Actually, I don’t know. Get rid of all regulation, Big Tobacco puts poison in their tobacco to enhance production (somehow); people die; people stop purchasing tobacco; Big Tobacco stops poisoning tobacco; people start purchasing tobacco again…
Self-regulating, right?
Will you guys stop talking about–Oh. Big Tobacco. Sorry.
And, OP, you can not care better if you don’t respond.
If what you propose happens, it goes back to the 1950s. A few million people come down with lung diseases or die from lung cancer or other related causes. Life goes on.
It wouldn’t be the end of the world, but things are better off the way they are now.
The rate of asthma declines precipitously, as nearly everyone so afflicted dies from it before reproductive age, due to secondhand smoke.
Insurance rates shoot sky-high as the incidence of building and auto fires increases.
58 farmers in the Carolinas buy new pickup trucks with the increased income.
Workplace productivity plummets as people smoke on the job.
Tobacco companies raise their prices to the old, taxed level, thinking that the smokers won’t notice.
humanafterall: You’d have to be really stupid to not foresee Airman Doors, USAF’s and No umlaut for U’s responses, both of which pretty much sum up the ‘not insane’ reply to your hypothetical. What was your purpose for starting this thread, then? Are you stupid? (Answer the second question first.)
So is it reliving the 1930s or the 1940s?
I kinda wonder if bars and restaurants would see a net drop in business as people who’ve gotten used to them being smoke free now stop going to them entirely as they abruptly turn back into smelly fog banks.
That plus it being harder to hire and retain staff, unless the staff also smokes, in which case more workman’s comp claims and sick days, eventually.
Would this also include tax regulations and current and future annual payments being made to state and the federal government to settle law suits?
Because if so the first worst case scenario to cope with would be the immediate loss of over $1 trillion in revenues. The 2010 federal budget was under 4 trillion in total mandatory and optional spending.
Someone is going to have to “cough up” that huge portion of the state and federal budgets, they already made big plans for that money. Apparently as a nation we can’t afford to give up smoking tobacco just yet. Maybe someday, if they ever discover some other plant that people would pay taxes to be able to smoke. But what are the chances of that?
The OP’s question is about tobacco laws vanishing overnight. But a lot of people are answering as if the question was, “What if everyone forgot tobacco was bad for you overnight?” There’s a significant anti-smoking culture in this country. That’s how all those laws got passed in the first place, after all. I expect a lot of bars would continue to maintain voluntary bans on smoking. I doubt you’d see too many cigarette commercials on TV, because of the inevitable outrage from the public. You almost certainly wouldn’t see a return of things like smoking sections, because non-smokers have become used to being able to go to restaurants or get on airplanes, and not be choked by tobacco smoke.
Now, given enough time, an unfettered tobacco company might be able to reverse these trends and restore something of the old smoking culture to the US. But I doubt they’d have enough time: whatever mechanism allowed for the invalidation of all the smoking laws in the States would be quickly rectified by the voters, who largely favor anti-smoking legislation - if not on the federal level, then almost certainly on a state-by-state basis.
Derleth: No, not stupid, just thinking that maybe the US goes to shit if the tobacco industry were to be allowed to do what they want. I would keep taxation, but that’s all.
I was wondering why we were remembering broccoli. I have GOT to start paying more attention.
Since secondhand smoke is a Grade A carcinogen, you’d have to provide Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for people to work in smoky environments and still fulfill workplace safety laws.
Ya gotta admit, tho. SpongeBob Squarepants cigarette packs are a great idea. 
Because if we allow Big Broccoli to go back to advertising their evil wares on TV and eliminate the no-broccoli sections of restaurants, chaos will result.
I suppose some restaurants and bars could use “you can smoke here!” as a marketing ploy, while others (probably a majority) will remain smoke free and the market will decide.
Personally, I always figured McDonald’s went smoke-free early on (well before the issue was legislated) because they wanted to keep people moving in and out of the restaurants quickly, and someone scarfing a Big Mac in four minutes and staying an extra five to smoke ran counter to that. As such, I don’t see McDonald’s dropping its rule, even if legally permitted to do so.